3 ms·

I'm not arguing that DoorDash creates no value, I'm arguing that it creates a ton of value for executives and shareholders while exploiting workers who are vast

I'm not arguing that DoorDash creates no value, I'm arguing that it creates a ton of value for executives and shareholders while exploiting workers who are vastly underpaid using opaque payment and tipping mechanisms. Yeah, affluent urban dwellers absolutely benefit from this system. But by choosing to use these services, you endorse this exploitation unless you choose to pay drivers anything close to a living wage, because the company sure isn't going to.

mistersys 6y ago
Of coarse the company is not going to pay more then the market-rate for gig workers. It's actually impossible for them, and will be even more impossible once DoorDash goes public, they'll be legally obligated by their shareholders to make the most money possible. Our legal system supports companies making the most money the market will allow, if they paid more then the market for delivery drivers the executive that made that decision would be fired. You aren't supporting exploitative practices by using DoorDash, you're giving somebody a job where they otherwise they wouldn't have any. You're funneling money from affluent city dwellers to the pockets of DoorDash's share holders yes, but also to their delivery drivers. Attacking a company for creating jobs where there weren't any before is silly. Attack the issues with the legal framework, not the people that are using it as designed.